Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7479007" data-attributes="member: 6801228">And getting fixes that allow the class to fit players preferred playstyle for free is bad? I don't care if WoTC thinks the problems are minor, there are lots of things they don't feel the need to address that I feel need attention, but "charging" players for trying to make their concept work is kind of a ridiculous stance to start with, IMO.Sure, though of course, dude on internet opinion may not be worth a lot. What do we mean by "engaged with" becomes a very important question. Also, if flanking rules and melee ranger are involved, the math changes. The reason "Engaged with" becomes important is because certain animals, like the Owl or Flying Serpent, get fly-by attacks. They have attacked and "engaged" the enemy, but do not remain adjacent. But, if Adjacent is our only concern, then running up and dodging is also considered "engaged" which may or may not fit what you are going with. I still don't like the idea of "here is a spell that lets you do what you should already be able to do" but adding in 10 temp hp and advantage on ranged attacks is pretty powerful. How powerful can be debated, since a spell like Faerie Fire will also give advantage, on multiple targets, but I could see this not feeling like being insulting as a must grab option. It is a must grab option for a beast master who wants to actually utilize their beast in combat, and must be cast every combat, and may be lost due to concentration, but at least it gives enough benefits to make it seem like you had a choice to begin with. Since you didn't change them my opinion of them doesn't change. And, while you say you might not always get a chance to revivify your companion, you very often will get a chance. Most combatant's don't drop til mid or late combat, giving you 10 rounds, and, unless your GM is really hard out to measure the seconds, once the combat ends and you say "I revive my companion" you've generally met the timeline. Additionally, the person who cares enough about their beast to take this spell will care enough to take measures to ensure they survive, such as curing them when they drop or stabilizing them. In addition to all of that, three death saves need to be failed, which is just hard enough to push this over the edge. Now, Raise Dead makes sense for the Cleric, because the Cleric will prepare Raise Dead the next day to cast it, and then not prepare it the following day when it isn't needed, but Rangers learn spells permanently, and they have only 11 spells known. That is fewer than the Eldritch Knight or the Arcane Trickster, and you aren't really going to expect those classes to take a spell like that Reincarnate Beast spell that they may use once a campaign and took as a precaution. It just doesn't work with the way the RAW class is designed.  That damage scaling can be either pretty good or really meh. For example, the d1 represents creatures who deal only a single point of damage like the hawk, but if you break down the likely math the Hawk is really dealing 1d4-3, which will just upgrade to a 1d6-3... which is still very likely to be 1 damage, since we have a minimum of 1. Alternatively, It can raise a wolf from 2d4 to 2d6, which is a pretty massive boost on average damage. Also, using some of your other spells can lead to other beasts being effected, like the rhino which will go from 2d8 to 2d10 (maybe 4d10 depending on reading of Charge). So, near useless for some beasts, decently powerful for others, and now the +1 magic bonus is pretty much worthless unless you are fighting something immune to non-magic damage, because the increased dice already get you a +1 or +2 to damage on average and you are better off going for the AC or DC boost. You changed absolutely nothing as far as I can tell, since I can't find a medium beast whose CR is higher than 1. Even pulled out Volo's and checked the Dinosaurs. So, unless there is something highly specific I missed, changing medium to 1/2 your level was a pointless choice. Also, all of my criticism of this spell from the first go around still applies. A DM who allows this spell will probably allow the exact same thing to happen without the spell, making it a moot point and a waste to take. Gaining the proficiencies is nice, Rangers get Dex and Str which may end up being useful. A lot of your skill proficiences are likely wasted on them, such as anything intelligence based since a player will likely not raise a beasts intelligence as their only usage for those 6 points. Again, it is something I may consider if I was forced to play a PHB Beastmaster, but most of it is actually not useful for the player compared to other spells they could take, and once more, out of 11 spells you are allowed over 20 levels, it becomes hard to justify taking a spell you will only use once. As an Alternative route compared to the Revised Ranger, I just don't see it being worth it. Command Beast doesn't exist, so I assume you mean Hunting Party. The phrasing is definitely more succinct, but it goes back to ranger casting limitations a little bit. You just made a high level spell that invalidates two other spells. Now, I did double check, and I was wrong, Ranger's can forget a spell they learned and learn a different spell, so this is somewhat less of a problem, but it just feels wonky as a design choice. Other than that... it is essentially the same spell as it was last time, just worded and not taking a concentration slot. And, I'm honestly starting to wonder what the beast master does when they run out of spell slots to support these spells. Since they provide temporary access to being a Beast Master.... a ranger up until 17th level when they can gain Heroic Beast has 4 combats from 5th level on where they can act in tandem with their companion, assuming the Ranger never loses concentration on their spell. Then, they start cannibalizing higher level slots, and this assumes the Ranger has cast no other 1st level spells at all. It is similiar to the paladin smite problem, but where the smite is additional gravy damage, that Hunting Party spell simply brings the beast master up to where they should be anyways. And, I'm not entirely sure why I would choose to take these spells and the PHB Beastmaster, when I could just as easily play the Revised Ranger. Many of the "benefits" you are giving out are the exact same benefits the Revised Ranger gives the Beastmaster, so since both are optional content, why would I choose this method which eats up spells known and spell slots over my other option which does not?</blockquote>

Verification